[Juliate]

I don't know where you're from, but in France, we did it.

Electricity was, and is still, rather clean, and cheap, and reliable, thanks to nuclear (see https://app.electricitymap.org/zone/FR ).

And the most striking example of that is how terrifying the rise of cost of electricty is coming ahead for consumers and enterprises, mainly because of other energy sources, rather than because of nuclear itself.

Renewables are all nice and thanks (and definitely to grow and improve), but they cannot, from a long way, deliver the sheer and stable massive amount of base energy that nuclear can.

Without monstruously large storage capacities that we don't have today, cutting ourselves from nuclear is a civilisational collapse guarantee.

[Gwypaas]

Government subsidized.

> In 2010, as part of the progressive liberalisation of the energy market under EU directives, France agreed the Accès régulé à l'électricité nucléaire historique (ARENH) regulations that allowed third party suppliers access up to about a quarter of France's pre-2011 nuclear generation capacity, at a fixed price of €42/MWh from 1 July 2011 until 31 December 2025.[47][48][49]

> As of 2015, France's household electricity price, excluding taxation, is the 12th cheapest amongst the 28 member European Union and the second-cheapest to industrial consumers.[50] The actual cost of generating electricity by nuclear power is not published by EDF or the French government but is estimated to be between €59/MWh and €83/MWh.[51]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France#Manage...

[Juliate]

https://www.iea.org/reports/projected-costs-of-generating-el... (International Energy Agency):

> Nuclear thus remains the dispatchable low-carbon technology with the lowest expected costs in 2025. Only large hydro reservoirs can provide a similar contribution at comparable costs but remain highly dependent on the natural endowments of individual countries. Compared to fossil fuel-based generation, nuclear plants are expected to be more affordable than coal-fired plants. While gas-based combined-cycle gas turbines (CCGTs) are competitive in some regions, their LCOE very much depend on the prices for natural gas and carbon emissions in individual regions. Electricity produced from nuclear long-term operation (LTO) by lifetime extension is highly competitive and remains not only the least cost option for low-carbon generation - when compared to building new power plants - but for all power generation across the board.

As for the "government subsidized", I don't see that a particular problematic issue, but that may be just me (a quite a few fellow French people) - that's my taxes at work.

[Gwypaas]

Sure, when you disregard the initial investment cost and only look at the marginal nuclear is among the cheapest. Although still being undercut by new investments in renewables nowadays.

That is the issue at hand, building new nuclear is not only marginal cost, it is mostly fixed costs and a unfathomable initial investment.

[Juliate]

The question is rather: how do you expect to get rid of nuclear energy production in the coming century AND reduce CO2 emissions AND not get energy blackouts and prices soaring to unimaginable levels?